You are on page 1of 1



Alana Indah Boaventura*1, Victor Manieri Schutzer¹, Matheus Mikael Quartaroli, Sueli Souza Leite¹, Bento
Rodrigues de Pontes Junior¹, João Eduardo Guarnetti dos Santos¹
¹ Sao Paulo State University “Julio de Mesquita Filho", Mechanical Engineering Departament, Bauru, SP, Brazil


With the increase of mechanization in agriculture,  1 single-axle agricultural tractor with 14.7 horsepower and 2750 rpm motor;
the number of accidents in this field increases,  1 Agricultural implement attachment;
generating a concern for the health of the operators  1 Seat sensor with a accelerometer, ICP Triaxial model, series: SEN027;
that work in this sector, mainly because they are Efficient  HVM-100 signal acquisition module, HVM100 Larson Davis brand, model
exposed to high-risk health activities due to Performance
ergonomic problems found in agricultural  For each condition, four one minute repetitions were performed;
machines, such as vibration (Santos et al., 2014). Figure 1. Objectives of Work Ergonomics.
 Blaze software for reading signals.
Human exposure to vibration can be classified as Full Body Vibration (FBV)  The time that the operator can be exposed to the vibrations obtained
Vibration in Hands and Arms. For the vibration that affects the whole body, the during the tests for an 8-hour workday was calculated:
most harmful frequency range is between 0.5 and 80 Hz (Gomes, Savionek,
Being A(8) the resultant acceleration of the normalized exposure,
2014). 𝑻 Aeq corresponding to the resulting acceleration exposure, T is the
𝑨(𝟖) = 𝑨𝒆𝒒 time of exposure to vibration and To corresponds to 8 hours or 480

For the evaluation of the vibration which reaches the Table 2. Conditions established for the tests.

operator of a particular machine, the International

Organization for Standardization standards, ISO 2631
(2001), which have a guide for the assessment of
human exposure to whole body vibration, were used. In
Brazil, NHO 09 (2013) were developed based on ISO
2631 (2001) standards.
Table 1. Judgment criterion and decision making.

Figure 2. Directions of positions for

measuring full body vibration. Figure 3. Seat sensor with triaxial accelerometer. Figure 4. HVM-100 signal Figure 5. Tractor with attached implement.
Source: Adapted from NHO-09 (2013). Source: ISO 2631(1978) acquisition module.

It can be observed that the accelerations followed the It was also found that in most of the tests
following increasing order: BS<BE<AE<AS. The performed, greater vibration acceleration was
boxplot graph (Fig. 7) shows that the data presented obtained on the x-axis, which, for the situations
low variability, especially in the low rotation test with tested, measures the vibration in the lower
elevated implement, and the presented outiliers are limbs of the operator regarding the frontal
due to the peaks resulting from the tests, where it is mobility of the limbs, while only the high-
also noted that the low rotation test with elevated 1600
rotation condition with elevated implement,
Ti K

implement did not obtain considerable peaks. 1400


obtained greater acceleration in the "z" axis,





O K

1 2 3 4 5 6
which measures the vibration in the lumbar

region of the human body.

It can be observed that the tractor in low
rotation, presented a situation of lower risk to
Figure 7. Behavior of the mean acceleration of the conditions tested.
the occupational health of the operator.
While in high rotation condition, the exposure
time is reduced drastically, not meeting the
daily 8-hour value recommended by ISO 2631
(2001) NHO 09 (2013), as shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Exposure time for the conditions tested.
Figure 6. Behavior of the instantaneous acceleration of the four tests.

The peaks presented in the curves (Fig. 6) are due to the

operation of the implement in b) contact with the ground
and the fact that it presents irregularities, which caused
an increase in the level of vibration in the operator. Figure 8. Average acceleration of the conditions tested.

 Low rotation  Lower risk to the occupational health of the operator; • Santos, L. N. et al. “Avaliação dos níveis de ruído e vibração de um conjunto tratorpulverizador, em função da
velocidade de trabalho”. Engenharia na Agricultura, Viçosa, v. 22, n. 2, p. 112-114, 2014.
x High rotation  Detriments to the occupational health of the operator; • Gomes, H. M.; Savionek, D., “Measurement and evaluation of human exposure to vibration transmitted to
The greatest occupational health risks are in the "x" and "z" axes, which hand-arm system during leisure cyclist activity”. Brazilian Journal of Biomedical Engineering, v.30, n.4, p.291-
300, dec. 2014.
refer to vibration in the lower limbs and lumbar region, respectively; • Cunha, I. A.; Giampaoli, E. Norma de higiene ocupacional - NHO 09: avaliação da exposição ocupacional a
It is recommended as immediate improvement, the use of seats with a vibrações de corpo inteiro. São Paulo: Fundacentro, 2013.
 higher level of absorption to reduce the transmissibility of vibration to the • ISO-2631 – Mechanical Vibration and shock – Evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration. Part 4:
Guidelines for the evaluation of the effects of vibration and rotational motion on passenger and crew
operator and to periodically perform maintenance on the tractor. comfort in fixed-guideway transport systems, 2001.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Student of master's in Mechanical Engineering with area of work in

ergonomic improvements (vibration and noise) in machine design, by the
This work was carried out with the financial support of CNPq (Process 1712897/2017). "Júlio de Mesquita Filho" State University - UNESP. Bachelor in Mechanical
The authors would like to thank to CAPES - Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Engineering, Federal University of Pampa - UNIPAMPA.
Education Personnel, for the Master's Degree scholarship.